Written Answers Friday 4 March 2011

Scottish Executive

Community Safety

Dr Richard Simpson (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what funding it provided to the Association of Scottish National Neighbourhood Watches in 2009-10 and has provided for (a) 2010-11 and (b) 2011-12.

Fergus Ewing: The Scottish Government has committed to provide funding to the Association of Scottish Neighbourhood Watches to the value of £255,547 between 2008 and 2011.

  The following table shows a breakdown of funding to the organisation for the period 2008 to 2012:

  

Period
Amount


2008-09
£ 85,900


2009-10
£ 85,515


2010-11
£ 84,132


2011-12
£ 75,000


Total
£330,547

Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service

Jamie Hepburn (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it is aware of proposed changes to autopsy services for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service in any NHS board area.

Frank Mulholland: The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service is currently discussing issues raised by NHS Lanarkshire regarding the provision of post mortems in Wishaw General Hospital.

Drug Misuse

Dr Richard Simpson (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the SMR25 forms for drug misusers are now in use in (a) all statutory drug services, (b) all voluntary drug services, (c) the Scottish Prison Service and (d) all general practices.

Fergus Ewing: I refer the member to the answer to question S3W-39037 on 9 February 2011. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at:

  http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/Apps2/Business/PQA/Default.aspx.

  Currently there is not 100% compliance for the submission of SMR25 forms in all statutory drug services, (b) all voluntary drug services, (c) the Scottish Prison Service and (d) all general practices.

  Statutory (includes all NHS and Local Authority Services) and Voluntary Drug Treatment Services:

  SMR25a forms are received from all statutory and voluntary drug treatment services in Scotland. Approximately 70% of these SMR25a submissions are completed electronically.

  In Greater Glasgow and Clyde and Aberdeen City approximately 65% and 75% respectively of statutory and voluntary drug treatment services currently submit SMR25a forms electronically to ISD Scotland.

  Outwith Greater Glasgow and Clyde and Aberdeen City, approximately 95% of statutory and voluntary drug treatment services currently submit SMR25a forms electronically to ISD.

  SMR25b forms are only submitted (electronically) by services who are also submitting electronic SMR25a forms. The vast majority of services that are submitting SMR25a forms electronically are also submitting SMR25b forms.

  ISD is working with data providers throughout Scotland to ensure that, as soon as possible, all services that provide a "comprehensive or specialist assessment of a client’s care/treatment needs in relation to drug misuse" are submitting electronic SMR25a and SMR25b forms to ISD Scotland.

  Prisons:

  Since 1 April 2010, drug treatment services within all 13 publicly funded Scottish prisons make electronic SMR25a and SMR25b submissions. At present, the two private prisons in Scotland do not currently submit any SMR25a or SMR25b data to ISD.

  ISD will shortly be engaging with the drug treatment services in the two private prisons with the aim of reaching a point where they are submitting SMR25a and SMR25b data electronically.

  Primary Care Providers (including GPs):

  SMR25a paper form submissions are received from a limited number of primary care providers. No electronic SMR25a or SMR25b submissions are received from primary care providers.

  ISD will shortly be following up its initial contact with GPs with the aim of reaching a point where all relevant GPs are submitting SMR25a paper forms to ISD. After this has been achieved ISD will work with these GPs with the aim of reaching a point where they are all submitting SMR25a and SMR25b data electronically.

Education

Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what funds it has made available for a Gaelic-medium school in Edinburgh and whether those funds are time-limited.

Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it is taking to establish a Gaelic-medium school in Edinburgh.

Michael Russell: Decisions on the future of Gaelic medium education in Edinburgh are for the City of Edinburgh Council. The Scottish Government recognises that there is strong support for a Gaelic school in Edinburgh from parents, from Bòrd na Gàidhlig, from other Gaelic interests and in an independent study commissioned by the council.

  The Scottish Government has supported Gaelic medium education in Edinburgh for many years with additional running cost support. In the course of this financial year the Scottish Government indicated that we would be keen to support the City of Edinburgh Council with capital support towards a Gaelic school and a specific offer was made in November and December 2010. This offer was limited to 2010-11. There will be a Gaelic Schools Capital Budget in 2011-12 and if required consideration can be given to support for the establishment of a Gaelic school in Edinburgh at that time.

Education

Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what priority it has attached to training teachers able to teach in Gaelic.

Michael Russell: The Scottish Government attaches a high priority to Gaelic teacher education. I have written to the Scottish Funding Council outlining that I wish to see the council continue to promote provision in this area, continue to pursue new avenues to increase the numbers of Gaelic teachers and to give consideration to initiatives which could improve effectiveness.

  In addition, the Scottish Government has provided financial support for the retention of a Gaelic Teacher Recruitment Officer who is based at Bòrd na Gàidhlig and is responsible for promoting the recruitment and education of Gaelic teachers.

Education

Elizabeth Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers outdoor learning to be an effective means of delivering the outcomes of Curriculum for Excellence.

Michael Russell: Yes. We believe that our children and young people’s learning experiences can be enhanced by maximising the potential of the outdoors. To help achieve this, we invested in the production and promotion of guidance in the form of curriculum for excellence through outdoor learning to support opportunities presented by the new school curriculum for learning in the outdoors. The guidance makes it clear that the outdoor environment offers motivating, exciting, different, relevant and easily accessible activities from pre-school years through to college. In addition, we have allocated more than £800,000 to support various initiatives to encourage the use of the outdoor environment to help deliver Curriculum for Excellence for all children and young people.

Education

Elizabeth Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what its position is on the need to develop teachers’ confidence and competence through training and guidance to increase the use of outdoor learning for the delivery of Curriculum for Excellence outcomes.

Michael Russell: Feedback from events to promote curriculum for excellence through outdoor learning emphasised that access to good quality continuous professional development opportunities is key to embedding outdoor learning in learning and teaching. While it is the responsibility of individual teachers, schools and local authorities to ensure access to appropriate continuing professional development (CPD) opportunities, we allocated funding of £100,000 in 2010-11 to enable Learning and Teaching Scotland to develop and deliver a CPD programme for teachers and early years practitioners. Currently, more than 730 teachers and practitioners have registered for the 51 sessions on offer. In addition the curriculum for excellence through outdoor learning online resource provides easy to navigate advice, guidance and examples of practice and resources to provide ideas and inspiration for learning in the outdoors.

Education

Elizabeth Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that Curriculum for Excellence through outdoor learning is helping to build the confidence and competence of teachers to make effective use of the outdoors to achieve Curriculum for Excellence outcomes.

Michael Russell: Yes. We believe that the support we are providing through Learning and Teaching Scotland as noted in the answers to questions S3W-39689, S3W-39690 and S3W-39693 on 4 March 2011 is helping to build the confidence and competence of teachers to make effective use of the outdoors. This is reinforced through very positive feedback from the continuing professional development events.

  All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at:

  http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/Apps2/Business/PQA/Default.aspx.

Education

Elizabeth Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that any momentum generated by implementing Curriculum for Excellence through outdoor learning in building the confidence and competence of teachers to make effective use of the outdoors to achieve Curriculum for Excellence outcomes should not be lost.

Michael Russell: We are committed to our children and young people having positive, sustainable and progressive opportunities to participate in a range of outdoor learning experiences. To achieve this it is imperative that the momentum and interest generated by curriculum for excellence through outdoor learning is maintained and built upon. The Outdoor Learning Implementation Group and National Network referred to in the answer to question S3W-39693 on 4 March 2011 will play key roles in taking outdoor learning forward but individual teachers, educational settings and local authorities must work together to embed the use of the outdoors in learning and teaching to provide powerful learning experiences.

Education

Elizabeth Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how (a) Learning and Teaching Scotland, (b) HM Inspectorate of Education and (c) teacher education institutes support the implementation of Curriculum for Excellence through outdoor learning and whether such support will continue when the Scottish Education Quality and Improvement Agency comes into operation.

Michael Russell: The Scottish Government allocated £300,000 in 2010-11 to Learning and Teaching Scotland (LTS) to support the implementation of curriculum for excellence through outdoor learning. This enabled LTS to: deliver a series of six regional events to raise awareness of curriculum for excellence through outdoor learning   and to consider implementation issues; establish and facilitate the Outdoor Learning Implementation Group to provide a strategic focus to implementation issues; establish and facilitate the Outdoor Learning Network to bring together local authorities and key partner organisations to share the benefits of outdoor learning and to provide national support to local networks; respond positively to feedback from the regional seminars by developing and delivering a continuing professional development (CPD) programme for teachers and early years practitioners.

  HMIE and the Scottish Teacher Education Committee support implementation as members of the Outdoor Learning Implementation Group and teacher education institutes have participated in the CPD programme for the benefit of their students.

  We will continue to provide support for implementation of curriculum for excellence through outdoor learning and we are discussing with Learning and Teaching Scotland and HMIE how this might be best achieved to ensure seamless ongoing support when the new Education Agency comes into being on 1 July 2011.

Education

Elizabeth Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how it will maintain any momentum generated by implementing Curriculum for Excellence through outdoor learning in building the confidence and competence of teachers to make effective use of the outdoors to achieve Curriculum for Excellence outcomes.

Michael Russell: As noted in the answers to questions S3W-39692 and S3W-39693 on 4 March 2011, the Outdoor Learning Implementation Group and National Network will play key roles in taking outdoor learning forward. In addition, we are discussing with Learning and Teaching Scotland and HMIE ongoing support for implementation of curriculum for excellence through outdoor learning and how this might be best achieved to ensure seamless ongoing support when the new Education Agency comes into being on 1 July 2011.

  All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at:

  http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/Apps2/Business/PQA/Default.aspx.

Education

John Farquhar Munro (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will consider publishing guidance on the teaching of the theory of intelligent design such as Guidance on the Place of Creationism and Intelligent Design in Science Lessons published for England and Wales.

Michael Russell: The curriculum in Scotland is not based on statutory prescription. It is for schools, in light of the curriculum framework within which they operate, to determine how best to organise the syllabus.

  However, there are no plans to include intelligent design within Curriculum for Excellence guidance and there is no evidence to suggest that intelligent design is being taught in science classes.

Education

John Farquhar Munro (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive what its position is on the validity of intelligent design as a scientific theory and whether it should be taught in science lessons.

Michael Russell: As intelligent design is not a scientific theory it is not included within Curriculum for Excellence guidance. Schools are free to determine, in light of the curriculum framework in which they operate, how best to organise the syllabus but there is no evidence to suggest that intelligent design is being taught in Scottish local authority schools.

Equalities

Cathie Craigie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether an equality impact assessment has been carried out as part of the decision-making process that has led to the cessation of funding for the Scottish Sensory Centre as of 31 March 2011.

Michael Russell: The Scottish Government has a strong commitment to equality and to tackling disadvantage and inequality. Equality contributes to our national purpose and economic targets and to a fairer and more inclusive Scotland.

  An equality statement on each Government portfolio, including Education and Lifelong Learning, is contained within Equality Statement Scotland’s Budget 2011-12. This equality statement provides a summary of the action that the Scottish Government has taken to ensure its equality impact assessment has been considered within the Scottish budget process. Through this budget, the Scottish Government is protecting the national services working directly with the most vulnerable children and young people.

Hepatitis

Michael Matheson (Falkirk West) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will announce additional support for people infected with hepatitis C or HIV through NHS treatment with blood or blood products.

Nicola Sturgeon: I have made an announcement on 4 March 2011 to extend the current support provisions in line with the recently published Contaminated Blood Review report, to:

  Introduce an annual payment of £12,800 for those living with hepatitis C who qualify for Stage 2 payments from the Skipton Fund;

  Allow posthumous clams for support to be made on behalf of people who died before 29 August 2003;

  Increase the one-off payment made to those who qualify for Stage 2 payments from £25,000 to £50,000 (whether the patient is alive or dead);

  Give access to discretionary fund for patients and/or their dependants suffering financial hardship;

  Relevant patients who develop hepatitis C-related B cell lymphoma to be eligible to claim for Stage 2 payment; and

  Increase the annual payment for those with hepatitis C/HIV in line with the consumer price index.

  I understand that patient representatives believe that payments to those in Stage 1 of the illness should also be increased. I am also therefore announcing that this issue, and the implementation of the measures confirmed today, will be reviewed when we consider the final report (and any recommendations) of the Penrose Inquiry.

  The cost of these new provisions is estimated to be around £18 million over the next five years. Funding for the first year has been earmarked from the health budget for 2011-12 and, thereafter, funding will be provided through future health budgets.

Justice

Richard Baker (North East Scotland) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what its position is the appropriateness of an individual who has committed 160 previous offences receiving a community payback order.

Kenny MacAskill: The Scottish Government has introduced the new community payback order so that low level offenders will be made to do work in the community backed by action to address the underlying causes which fuel the crime, such as alcohol, drugs and mental health issues, because the evidence shows these sentences are far more effective than those received by the 70% of individuals who are currently reoffending after serving short term prison sentences.

  It remains for the court to determine the most appropriate penalty in each case, based on its assessment of the particular details and circumstances of the offender and the offence.

Justice

Richard Baker (North East Scotland) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what assessment it has made of the rape conviction rate.

Frank Mulholland: According to the national statistics, Criminal Proceedings in Scotland 2009-10, published on 25 January 2011, the conviction rate of persons indicted on charges of rape is 45%. This is an increase of 11% from the previous year. This increase is encouraging as it corresponds with the establishment of the National Sexual Crimes Unit and the approach to the investigation and prosecution of sexual offences in Scotland. The unit is led by a dedicated team of specialist Crown counsel who direct criminal investigations from the earliest stages and provide advice and expertise to Procurators Fiscal and the police.

Justice

Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive when it will take forward the review of the cost and funding of litigation recommended by the Lord Justice Clerk, Lord Gill, in The Report of the Scottish Civil Courts Review.

Fergus Ewing: A review of the costs and funding of litigation in Scotland is to be undertaken very shortly and will be led by Sheriff Principal James Taylor when he retires from the bench in April.

  The terms of reference for the review are:

  To review the costs and funding of civil litigation in the Court of Session and Sheriff Court in the context of the recommendations of the Scottish Civil Courts Review, and the response of the Scottish Government to that review.

  In undertaking this review, to:

  Consult widely, gather evidence, compare our expenses regime with those of other jurisdictions and have regard to research and previous enquiries into costs and funding, including the Civil Litigation Costs Review of Lord Justice Jackson;

  Consider issues in relation to the affordability of litigation; the recoverability and assessment of expenses, and different models of funding litigation (including contingency, speculative and conditional fees, before and after the event insurance, referral fees and claims management);

  Consider the extent to which alternatives to public funding may secure appropriate access to justice, and pay particular attention to the potential impact of any recommendations on publically funded legal assistance;

  Have regard to the principles of civil justice outlined in Chapter 1, paragraph 5 of the Civil Courts Review;

  Consider other factors and reasons why parties may not litigate in Scotland; and

  Report with recommendations to Scottish ministers, together with supporting evidence within 18 months of the work commencing.

Marine Environment

Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how many seal licences for killing (a) grey and (b) common seals under section 110(1)(f) and (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 have been granted to (i) individuals, (ii) seal management groups and (iii) other groups or organisations.

Richard Lochhead: The total of 65 seal licences issued on 31 January 2011 consisted of four issued to seal management groups and 61 issued to other groups or organisations. No seal licences were issued to individuals.

Marine Environment

Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how many (a) common and (b) grey seals each (i) fish farm, (ii) river fishery board, (iii) marine coastal fishery, (iv) netsman and (v) other applicant for a seal licence under section 110(1)(f) or (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 (A) have requested to shoot and (B) will be permitted to shoot, broken down by seal management area.

Richard Lochhead: Marine Scotland grants seal licences in response to applications received rather than to any individual fish farms or fisheries. Therefore all information held on licences is on the basis of applications, including numbers of seals applicants have requested to shoot and any maximum numbers that they will be permitted to shoot.

  This information is set out in Table 2 of the frequently asked questions paper at:

  http://www.scotland.gov.uk/topics/marine/licensing/seallicensing.

Marine Environment

Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how many inspections of fish farms were undertaken by Marine Scotland to verify the use of non-lethal measures to deter grey and common seals before granting seal licences to fish farms under section 110(1)(f) or (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010.

Richard Lochhead: The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 does not require Scottish ministers to have regard to any information about non-lethal measures in relation to licences granted under section 110 (1) (f).

  In respect of the single application in relation to fish farms under section 110(1)(g), Marine Scotland undertook no inspections specifically for this purpose.

  Marine Scotland did however, take account of available information on non-lethal measures before granting a licence in consideration of all licences under sections 110(1)(f) and 110(1)(g).

  This included the fact that almost all fish farms seeking a seal licence already employ at least one and many a number of non-lethal measures. The non-lethal measure that is generally accepted to be most effective against seals is tensioned nets and almost all fish farms have such nets installed. In addition to this, almost half of fish farms use acoustic deterrents, a third seal blinds and a fifth anti-predator nets. There are a range of views on the effectiveness of these other measures but none have entirely eliminated the risk of seal predation.

Marine Environment

Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how many seal licences for (a) common and (b) grey seals under section 110(1)(f) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 were (i) applied for and (ii) granted to newly established fish farms on the basis of information regarding the negative effects on the health and welfare of farmed fish not at the facility applying but at equivalent facilities in the same vicinity or of a similar type.

Richard Lochhead: Marine Scotland grants licences in response to applications received rather than to individual fish farms. Therefore information received relates to applications which may or may not include individual newly established fish farms.

  In addition the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 does not require Scottish ministers to have regard to any information about damage caused by seals in relation to licences granted under section 110(1)(f).

  Marine Scotland nevertheless considers any available information about negative effects on the health and welfare of farmed fish.

Marine Environment

Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how many fish farms seeking licences to kill (a) grey and (b) common seals under section 110(1)(f) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 provided evidence of the cost or potential cost to the fish farm of the negative effects of seals on the health and welfare of farmed fish and what weight was given to this evidence in determining whether to grant a licence.

Richard Lochhead: Marine Scotland grants licences in response to applications received rather than to individual fish farms.

  The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 does not require Scottish ministers to have regard to any information about damage caused by seals or non-lethal measure in relation to licences granted under section 110(1)(f).

  Marine Scotland nevertheless considers any available information about the cost or potential cost to the applicant of any negative effects on the health and welfare or farmed fish.

  Marine Scotland considers each application on a case by case basis against a range of factors and allocates appropriate weight to each.

Marine Environment

Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether applications for seal licences for (a) grey and (b) commons seals have been made to Marine Scotland under section 110(1)(f) and (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 and, if so, whether any licences have been granted to the same applicant under both categories.

Richard Lochhead: One applicant submitted applications for grey and common seals under both sections 110 (1)(f) and 110 (1)(g). A licence was granted to this applicant under each category with appropriate consideration of possible duplication and potential impact on local seal populations.

Marine Environment

Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how it will verify that (a) grey and (b) common seals killed under seal licences under section 110(f) or (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 were shot only as a last resort in accordance with the Scottish Seal Management Code of Practice.

Richard Lochhead: Marine Scotland will review the quarterly reports submitted by licensees and consider any other available evidence.

Marine Environment

Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what methodology Marine Scotland has required applicants for seal licences for (a) grey and (b) common seals under section 110(1)(f) or (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 to use to establish how many seals they need to shoot in 2011.

Richard Lochhead: Marine Scotland recommended that this assessment should be realistic and, wherever possible, based on previous experience.

Marine Environment

Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether applications for seal licences for (a) grey and (b) common seals have been received by Marine Scotland for purposes other than those described in section 110(1)(f) and (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 and, if so, for what purposes, broken down by seal management area.

Richard Lochhead: Marine Scotland received one application for a seal licence to take grey and common seals under section 110 (1) (a) for scientific research or educational purposes across all of Scotland. It did not seek to kill any seals.

Marine Environment

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive what allowances it makes for (a) natural and (b) other anthropogenic causes of seal mortality when deciding the number of grey and common seals that may be shot under licence under section 110(1)(f) and (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010.

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive what allowance it makes for misidentification of species when deciding the number of grey and common seals that may be shot under licence under section 110(1)(f) and (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010.

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive for what reason Marine Scotland selected the highest number in the potential biological removal range calculated by the Sea Mammal Research Unit when deciding how many common seals could be killed under licence in the Moray Firth Seal Management Area.

Richard Lochhead: The calculation of the potential biological removal (PBR) figure which provides the basis for seal licensing, makes allowance for all natural causes of seal mortality and also includes a precautionary element.

  Marine Scotland makes additional allowance for other anthropogenic causes of seal mortality and for possible misidentification of species using best available information.

  Marine Scotland selected the PBR it considered most appropriate for the Moray Firth seal management area on the basis of five years of operational experience of seal management through the Moray Firth Seal Management Plan.

Marine Environment

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it will take to reduce the numbers of seals killed in Scottish waters.

Richard Lochhead: The Scottish Government has already achieved the most significant advance in seal protection in 40 years through the introduction of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010. This has made it an offence to kill any seal at any time unless under licence or to alleviate suffering.

  The number of seals permitted to be killed under licence is significantly less than any of the estimated figures previously offered by NGO’s.

  The Scottish Government will continue to consider how to reduce numbers of seals killed in Scottish waters.

Marine Environment

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive how many licences to kill common seals in the East Coast Seal Management Area under section 110(1)(f) and (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 have been granted for the (a) Firth of Tay Seal Conservation Area and (b) the rest of the East Coast Seal Management Area and for how many seals in each.

Richard Lochhead: No licences to kill common seals have been granted in the East Coast Seal Management Area or in the Firth of Tay Seal Conservation Area.

Marine Environment

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive how many licences to kill common seals in the Moray Firth Seal Management Area under section 110(1)(f) and (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 have been granted for the (a) Moray Firth Seal Conservation Area and (b) the rest of the Moray Firth Seal Management Area and for how many seals in each.

Richard Lochhead: All licences issued for common seals in the Moray Firth Seal Management Area also lie within the Moray Firth Seal Conservation Area. The number of licences and the number of seals granted can be found in Tables 1 and 2 of the frequently asked questions paper at:

  http://www.scotland.gov.uk/topics/marine/licensing/seallicensing.

Marine Environment

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive how many licences to kill common seals in the Orkney and North Coast Seal Management Area under section 110(1)(f) and (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 have been granted for the (a) Orkney and North Coast Seal Conservation Area and (b) the rest of the Orkney and North Coast Seal Management Area, and for how many seals in each.

Richard Lochhead: In the Orkney and North Coast Seal Management Area a total of two licences for three common seals have been granted under section 110 (1)(f) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 for the area within the Orkney Seal Conservation Area and a further six licences for six common seals under section 110 (1)(g) have been granted for the rest of this seal management area, which lies outwith the seal conservation area.

Marine Environment

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive how many licences to kill common seals in the Shetland Seal Management Area under section 110(1)(f) and (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 have been granted for the (a) Shetland Seal Conservation Area and (b) the rest of the Shetland Seal Management Area and for how many seals in each.

Richard Lochhead: All licences issued for common seals in the Shetland Seal Management Area also lie within the Shetland Seal Conservation Area. The number of licences and number of seals granted can be found in tables 1 and 2 of the frequently asked questions paper at:

  http://www.scotland.gov.uk/topics/marine/licensing/seallicensing.

Marine Environment

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive how many licences to kill common seals in the Western Isles Seal Management Area under section 110(1)(f) and (g) of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 have been granted for the (a) Western Isles Seal Conservation Area and (b) the rest of the Western Isles Seal Management Area and for how many seals in each.

Richard Lochhead: All licences issued for common seals in the Western Isles Seal Management Area also lie within the Western Isles Seal Conservation Area. The number of licences and the number of seals granted can be found in Tables 1 and 2 of the frequently asked questions paper at:

  http://www.scotland.gov.uk/topics/marine/licensing/seallicensing.

Marine Environment

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive which elements of the National Marine Plan will ensure that the development of aquaculture sites does not lead to the harassment of grey seals and common seals at haul-out sites.

Richard Lochhead: The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 sets out that public authorities must take enforcement and authorisation decisions in accordance with the marine plan. The pre consultation draft National Marine Plan will include a map of seal haul-out sites as developed by the Sea Mammal Research Unit under consideration for "designation" under the act in order to protect seals from harassment. Once the plan is adopted by the Parliament any designated seal haul-out sites will be taken into account in planning decisions.

Marine Environment

Robin Harper (Lothians) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the impact of new fish farm developments on local seal populations is assessed during the screening process for new site designations and, if so, what reasons have been given by operators of new fish farms for applying for seal licences.

Richard Lochhead: The possible general impact of any proposed new fish farm development on local seal populations is currently one of a range of environmental issues that should be considered by developers and public authorities when considering relevant plans and development proposals including, where required, via strategic environmental assessments, environmental impact assessments and habitats regulations appraisals.

  The need for new fish farms to prevent serious damage to their site or stock and to protect the health and welfare of farmed fish against seal predation and the potential impact of this on local seal populations is considered separately by Marine Scotland as part of the process of consideration of any application for a seal licence under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010.

Marine Environment

Tavish Scott (Shetland) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive what its reasons are for not acting on the suggestion from two local authorities, in response to the Consultation on Marine Licensing for Scotland, that the business and regulatory impact assessments should have recognised the option of delegating marine licensing responsibilities to public authorities and costed these.

Richard Lochhead: The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 delivers stakeholders’ requirements for a streamlined and simplified licensing regime that delivers consistent results across Scotland and the UK. The creation of the Marine Scotland Licensing Operations Team (LOT) as a "one stop shop" for all marine licence applications, allows efficient, streamlined and consistent decision making across Scotland. LOT is located in the Marine Laboratory in Aberdeen and benefits from the best available scientific expertise and experience. An efficient, streamlined and consistent licensing regime is essential for Scotland to fully exploit the development of its marine renewables potential.

Marine Environment

Tavish Scott (Shetland) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive how it will monitor the issues raised by the two local authorities that suggested, in response to the Consultation on Marine Licensing for Scotland, that the business and regulatory impact assessments should have recognised the option of delegating marine licensing responsibilities to public authorities and costed these.

Richard Lochhead: The Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment carried out by Marine Scotland to inform the incoming fees structure, gives a commitment to review the costs to the Scottish Government of administrating the new licensing regime. Marine Scotland will follow up on that commitment and will implement procedures to monitor the performance of the Licensing Operations Team under the new licensing regime.

Planning

Hugh O'Donnell (Central Scotland) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive what the geographical area defined as Scottish territorial waters is in relation to offshore wind farm construction.

Richard Lochhead: The area defined as Scottish territorial waters extends out to 12 nautical miles from the coastal baseline. In addition, Scottish Ministers have the function of granting consents under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 for offshore wind farms both in the territorial sea adjacent to Scotland and in the sea area identified in the Schedule to the Renewable Energy Zone (Designation of Area) (Scottish Ministers) Order 2005 (S.I. 2005/3153).

Police Complaints

John Lamont (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, following the consultation on a possible merger with the Scottish Public Sector Ombudsman, when it plans to announce its decision on the future of the Police Complaints Commissioner for Scotland.

Kenny MacAskill: Following careful consideration of the views expressed by stakeholders in response to my letter about the future of police complaints handling, I remain of the view that the principle set out in the Sinclair Recommendations on simplifying public service complaints handling stands and that it would be appropriate to move the functions of the Police Complaints Commissioner for Scotland (PCCS) to the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO).

  I have therefore instructed officials to set up a short-life working group with officials from the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, the PCCS and the SPSO to identify and consider solutions to all the practical issues involved in a transfer, so that advice on this can be given to the next administration.

  I have written to policing stakeholders, including the Justice Committee, and to other respondents to my original letter, in those terms.

Prison Service

Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what has changed since the publication of the Report on the Review of Prison Visiting Committees, 2005 that has required a further consultation on the independent monitoring of prisons.

Kenny MacAskill: This administration’s commitment to simplify Scotland’s landscape of public sector organisations is a key driver for looking afresh at independent monitoring of prisons.

  The consultation on independent monitoring of prisons purpose sought views on the system for monitoring the quality and safety of prisons and the treatment of prisoners in Scotland in this context.

Prison Service

Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how it would protect the monitoring role of prison visiting committees if their functions were integrated into HM Inspectorate of Prisons.

Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how it would protect the independence of prison visiting committees if their functions were integrated into HM Inspectorate of Prisons.

Kenny MacAskill: The consultation on independent monitoring of prisons closed on 25 February 2011. The responses will be analysed and a findings report will be available before dissolution of the Parliament on 23 March 2011. It is not possible at this time to pre-empt any decisions following the consultation. Any work following the findings report and my response will be done to ensure appropriate independent monitoring of prisons in Scotland.

Prison Service

Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what support there has been for the proposal that the functions of prison visiting committees be integrated into HM Inspectorate of Prisons.

Kenny MacAskill: The consultation on independent monitoring of prisons closed on 25 February 2011. The responses are being analysed and a report on the outcomes will be available before dissolution of the Parliament on 23 March 2011. This will include details of reactions to the proposed question on the integration of visiting committees with HM Inspectorate of Prisons.

Rural Development

Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive how many rural development grants have been awarded in the Borders and at what (a) total and (b) average value, in each year since 2007.

Richard Lochhead: The following table sets out funding value and cases per year in the Borders for schemes under the current Scotland Rural Development Programme 2007-13, worth some £65.8 million in total. The Less Favoured Area Support Scheme was the only scheme to begin payments in 2007; the other SRDP schemes ran from 2008 onwards.

  

Scheme
Year
Cases
Value
Average


Forestry Challenge Funds
2008
1
£19,840
£19,840


2009
3
£79,887
£26,629


2010
1
£53,196
£53,196


Food Processing, Marketingand Cooperation
2008
2
£152,322
£76,161


2010
2
£244,792
£122,396


2011
2
£762,840
£381,420


Land Managers’ Options(LMO)1
2008
150
£140,000
£933


2009
511
£461,000
£902


2010
731
£1,413,000
£1,933


LEADER
2008
9
£507,543
ht£56,394


2009
12
£448,529
£37,377


2010
19
£1,281,279
£67,436


Less Favoured AreaSupport Scheme (LFASS)2
2007
646
£6,224,290
£9,635


2008
719
£6,176,003
£8,590


2009
649
£6,173,919
£9,513


2010
323
£2,406,241
£7,450


Rural Priorities
2008
84
£6,109,553
£70,225


2009
243
£15,918,547
£65,508


2010
134
£17,174,563
£128,168


2011
4
£31,675
£7,919


Total Value – All Schemes
 
 
£65,779,019
 



  Notes:

  1. For LMO, case numbers and value are for applications made.

  2. For LFASS, case numbers and value are for payments made. 2010 payments are ongoing.

  The Skills Development Scheme mainly awards grants to national bodies or bodies with a remit beyond a single region. Some of these projects may well benefit or involve Borders farmers, but we have not awarded any grants specifically in the Borders. There were no awards in the Borders under the Crofting Counties Agricultural Grants Scheme.

Rural Development

Elaine Murray (Dumfries) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what funding is available for farm diversification for equine activities.

Richard Lochhead: There are a number of options under the Rural Priorities element of the Scotland Rural Development Programme, including diversification outwith agriculture and development/creation of micro-enterprises, aimed at supporting diversification to improve the viability of existing agricultural businesses. This may include various leisure, recreation and sporting activities, including equine activities. More details can be found on the Rural Priorities website at:

  http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/farmingrural/SRDP/RuralPriorities.

Schools

Elizabeth Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how many school playing fields have been sold in each year since 2007, broken down by local authority

Elizabeth Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how much each local authority has raised by selling playing fields in each year since 2007

Michael Russell: The information requested is not held centrally.

Schools

Dr Richard Simpson (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether all schools maintain an up-to-date asthma register.

Adam Ingram: This information is not held centrally because schools are not obliged to maintain an asthma register. However, they are required to take action to ensure the wellbeing of children and young people, including those with asthma. Therefore this is a matter for education authorities and schools themselves.

Scottish Government Funding

Dr Richard Simpson (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what funding it will provide to the Scottish Business Crime Centre for the three-year period following March 2011.

Fergus Ewing: The Scottish Government is committed to providing £265,902 to the Scottish Business Crime Centre (SBCC) for the period 2011-12.

  A funding proposal for full three year funding beyond March 2012 is expected to be submitted by the SBCC for consideration in the summer/autumn of 2011.

Scottish Government Meetings

Dr Richard Simpson (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-39117 by Kenny MacAskill on 7 February 2011, whether it will place in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (SPICe) the (a) agendas, (b) training materials, (c) names, organisations and positions of attendees, (d) subsequent notes and (e) attendees’ evaluations of the events.

Kenny MacAskill: The Scottish Resilience Development Service training materials and notes would be of considerable commercial advantage to private sector training providers. It would therefore not be appropriate to publish such material. In addition, the names, organisations and positions along with attendees’ evaluations could only be obtained at disproportionate cost. A description of the training events along with details of the location and number of attendees is available in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (Bib. Number 52523)

Teachers

Cathie Craigie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how many teachers of deaf children are employed in each local authority area.

Michael Russell: This is a matter for local authorities. The information requested is not held centrally.

Teachers

Cathie Craigie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how many teachers of deaf children are currently working toward attaining the mandatory qualification standards as specified by the Requirements for Teachers (Scotland) Regulations 2005.

Michael Russell: The information requested is not held centrally.

  Under the terms of the Requirements for Teachers (Scotland) Regulations 2005, local authorities are required to employ teachers who are registered with the General Teaching Council for Scotland and who have the appropriate skills and knowledge for the post in which they are employed.

Teachers

Cathie Craigie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how many teachers of deaf children employed by local authorities wholly or mainly to support deaf children have completed the mandatory training as specified by the Requirements for Teachers (Scotland) Regulations 2005.

Michael Russell: This is a matter for local authorities. The information requested is not held centrally.

  Under the terms of the Requirements for Teachers (Scotland) Regulations 2005, local authorities are required to employ teachers who are registered with the General Teaching Council for Scotland and who have the appropriate skills and knowledge for the post in which they are employed.

Teachers

Cathie Craigie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what opportunities are offered to teachers of deaf children to access nationally accredited continuing professional development courses related to the education of deaf children.

Michael Russell: The Scottish Government is fully committed to ensuring that teachers continue to develop their skills to help achieve better outcomes for every child and young person. However, it is for each local authority to determine the resources available for continuing professional development, having regard to national and local priorities.

  Currently there are a number of accredited continuing professional development courses related to the education of deaf children.

Teachers

Cathie Craigie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what monitoring takes place of locally obtained competencies-based training, as specified by the Requirements for Teachers (Scotland) Regulations 2005.

Michael Russell: Under the terms of the Requirements for Teachers (Scotland) Regulations 2005 local authorities are required to employ teachers who are registered with the General Teaching Council for Scotland and who have the appropriate professional skills and knowledge for the post in which they are employed. Assessment of whether teachers have the appropriate skills and knowledge through initial teacher education or continuing professional development is a matter for the local authority as employer.

Wildlife

Liam McArthur (Orkney) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive how many beavers have been captured in Tayside by Scottish Natural Heritage and where each is kept.

Roseanna Cunningham: One beaver has been captured in Tayside by Scottish Natural Heritage and is currently being kept at Edinburgh Zoo by the Royal Zoological Society for Scotland.

Wildlife

Liam McArthur (Orkney) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the beaver captured in the River Ericht is alive and, if so, where it is kept.

Roseanna Cunningham: No beaver has been trapped by Scottish Natural Heritage in the River Ericht.

Wildlife

Liam McArthur (Orkney) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive what legal basis permits Scottish Natural Heritage to capture beavers on land where landowners are not willing to give them access.

Roseanna Cunningham: There are no powers which enable Scottish Natural Heritage to gain access to land to capture beavers where landowners are not willing to give them permission.

  However, The Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill, which was passed on 2 March 2011, introduces a new regime of species control orders that would enable access to land to control invasive non-native animals or plants.

Wildlife

Liam McArthur (Orkney) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive what assessment was made of the impact on otters and other protected species by the trapping of beavers on Tayside.

Roseanna Cunningham: Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) staff and volunteer trappers have conducted an informal assessment of the trapping sites and use local knowledge of the presence of otters and other protected species prior to making the decision to proceed with trapping. SNH does not conduct beaver trapping within 30 metres of otter holts.

Wildlife

Liam McArthur (Orkney) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the (a) Tayside and (b) Knapdale beavers are legally termed as (i) res nullius or (ii) private property.

Roseanna Cunningham: This would be a matter for the courts to determine.

Wildlife

Liam McArthur (Orkney) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive what the criteria are for beavers to be permitted to become established in the wild.

Roseanna Cunningham: The licence application by Scottish Wildlife Trust/Royal Zoological Society of Scotland for the Knapdale Trial contains criteria for the success or failure of the beaver trial. If the Knapdale trial is judged successful these criteria could be used to inform the development of wider criteria relating to the possible establishment of beavers in the wild.

  Scottish ministers will not only assess the results of the Knapdale Trial, but also take into account other relevant information such as experience from Europe and North America and information from the Beaver-Salmonid Working Group which reports to the National Species Reintroduction Forum.

Wildlife

Liam McArthur (Orkney) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive how many beavers are resident in the Knapdale trial area and, of these, how many (a) are the original beavers introduced, (b) have been born, (c) have died and (d) have gone missing during the trial.

Roseanna Cunningham MSP: There are 12 animals resident in the Knapdale trial area as of 18 February 2011.

  Specifically:

  (a) Six beavers of the original release and four from subsequent releases since June 2009 are currently resident in the Knapdale trial area.

  (b) Two beavers have been born within the site.

  (c) Two beavers died at the trial site (one of the original animals and one released since June 2009), and one animal (one of the original animals) was removed due to welfare reasons and later died at Edinburgh Zoo.

  (d) Three beavers have gone missing from the trial area and are now assumed to have died.

Wildlife

Liam McArthur (Orkney) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive where the replacement beavers for the Knapdale trial originated.

Roseanna Cunningham: The replacement beavers were brought from the Telemark area of Norway.

Wildlife

Liam McArthur (Orkney) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has an exit strategy for the Knapdale beaver trial should it find that the reintroduction of beavers is not appropriate and, if so, how such a strategy would be implemented.

Roseanna Cunningham: The licence application by the Scottish Wildlife Trust/Royal Zoological Society of Scotland contains an exit strategy for implementation during, or at the end, of the trial. The exit strategy contains four options for implementation. These are:

  Option 1: Repatriation of animals to the country of origin/transfer to other reintroduction programmes;

  Option 2: Housing of animals in zoological collections;

  Option 3: Capturing, neutering and returning animals to live their life span in the wild; and

  Option 4: Humane control of animals.